I wish I took that screen of myself moving back to my zerg from the ennemy zerg with 4 thieves heartseeking my gear shield.

Seeing the icon it looks like you brought someone down and a whole tsunami of opponents just came straight to you.
Well I don't know what to say, except that it tends to get me jaded at times, because of that and... well, because I'm a roamer with no superior escape skills.

In one respect it is working just fine. You never quite know when your next asskicking will come or how. I was most quickly dispatched by a trio of coordinated thieves last night on a supply run.

On the flipside I do think there is a problem in that I do not think ANet quite knows what kind of game they wanted to make. Essentially what we have is something too large to be an arena fight but too small to satisfy armchair generals .

IMHO with temporary matchups hard limits on the number of people on the map and small maps they need to get it in their mindset it is a battleground and not true open world pvp. Rather they have made an arena with open PvP elements. I say improving the mode so that it is self sustained and uses its own gear and builds like sPvP is a good first step.

Smarter map design and perhaps a new objective type between a supply camp and a tower to give some smaller groups something to do and to encourage zerg splitting are ideas beyond that.

I've never understood why WvW appeals to so many people. It's just one zerg after another with loose tactics involving siege equipment and the odd mesmer surprise buttsecks. It's not 'real'' PvP. What I want to see is something like AB back, or a district system that would limit the amount of people on a battlefield at any one time whilst opening up new ones. Sure this might be 'immersion' wrecking for openworld but I would much rather see decent squad based combat than this.

1000s of skills may have lead to imbalance but at least it allowed the game to stay compelling. Maybe if we could try out new builds without being charged it might become more interesting. But between repair costs *which should not be in WvW imo* and skill reset costs why would anyone want to try new things that might result is death and more repair costs? Could go to the sPvP but who wants to go there and lose all those hours you spent grinding for cool gear.

WvW is too much zerg for me. I like the concept but I think it's too large. All of the culling is the proof. That's what really drives me up the wall. Think your team is winning the point then all of sudden 10 people pop on top of you already deep in battle. My number complaint about PvP in general is the dodge. Only dodge counts because every ranged attack in the game has tracking. I miss being able to sidestep. Don't know why they removed that.

Let's not just pour hate over ANet for the problems of WvW . The core systems in place sounded good a year ago and it took a while for the shine to wear off to realize what the problems were (all of the early WvW whining I saw just wasn't insightful except for complaints the maps were too small or not clever enough ).

It takes time to realize unanticipated problems. One of the biggest innovations GW2 brought to the table was the matchups would change based on rankings. I now realize all too late it is much better to have three factions on the same server in perpetual battle in a persistent world. I thought the rotating system wounded like a good idea for a while until I realized it creates a fundamental disconnect between what open world PvP is and the game's mechanics.

I see now in hindsight how ideas looked good at the time but were doomed to fail. I do not think it is reasonable to expect ANet to have realized it when I did not at the time either.

I am giving them a chance. We do have an update coming let's see if that helps, but ANet needs to fundamentally change their mindset. I do not believe they should try for a true open world pvp at this time because the existing architecture does not support it. Rather let's try to make a small army vs. Small army arena.

Isn't that exactly what's supposed to happen if you let a zerg catch you?

The only real issue I have with slow moving groups of easy targets is when they appear on my screen after they kill me, and culling is already being worked on. Other than that it's just fair not paying attention or making a mistake gets me killed.

There are plenty of smaller groups out there as well, so it's not like you have to zerg if that's what you're trying to say.

I hate zergs, i never join my server ones and i always solo roam no matter what.

As someone hast stated, yes i downed a player (which was 3v1) then i turned the camera and pew pew. I'm not complaining about WvW being too zergy, it is as it is and it will never change. I'm complaining about the lack of real open world pvp or something that doesn't encourage zerging and is not caputere points.

Coren, on 12 February 2013 - 02:24 PM, said:

Soooooo you got zerged? Who hasn't?

ANet always said.WvW would be chaos, and you know what? I love it.

Is that chaos for you? wow.

heatrr, on 09 February 2013 - 11:39 PM, said:

If you do not like running in a zerg then do not.
Roam or run with smaller groups if that is more to your liking.
WvW will always have zergs.

I hate zergs, i never join my server ones and i always solo roam no matter what.

As someone hast stated, yes i downed a player (which was 3v1) then i turned the camera and pew pew. I'm not complaining about WvW being too zergy, it is as it is and it will never change. I'm complaining about the lack of real open world pvp or something that doesn't encourage zerging and is not caputere points.

Is that chaos for you? wow.

just quoting as my responds appeal your statement

Never said THAT was chaos, I said ANet always said WvW would be chaos. Please read first.

I've never understood why WvW appeals to so many people. It's just one zerg after another with loose tactics involving siege equipment and the odd mesmer surprise buttsecks. It's not 'real'' PvP. What I want to see is something like AB back, or a district system that would limit the amount of people on a battlefield at any one time whilst opening up new ones. Sure this might be 'immersion' wrecking for openworld but I would much rather see decent squad based combat than this.

The reason why its zerg vs zerg is because the lack of cc. If you played DAoC for example, you would know that CC is the best way to counter a large zerg. When you have classes dedicated to CC you can time your CC's and control a larger group with a smaller group and win the battle. However, now of days so many people cry about CC, that games like GW2 put in VERY little amount of CC, so that made their WvW into power with numbers. Not to mention how aoe's only effect 5 people and how they want to nerf aoe's even more. Thus making the game favor zergs even more.

HA was always a gimmick fest too, but at least you had to understand what was going on. Any idiot could win UW running an iway war, thumper, tab hexing, whatever the degenerate fotm was, but what defined good teams was their ability to win relics, cap points and KoTH, where smashing keys didn't get the job done. The current state of affairs in w3 is all ball up on the blue dorito, then smash all your keys. That's all these super-zerg guilds are doing and it's getting old really fast.

I don't think there's a future for w3 unless something is done to nerf the zerg, either by decreasing attack when there are too many players in a certain radius, adding powerful CC for w3, or adding in much more that can be accomplished with 5-10 players. The latter would be my preference because it would make zerging obsolete, or at least far from optimum without tons of crying.

It's got to a point as well where people and servers think they are good because they win by sheer numbers.
You're in the higher tiers? Good for you, you aren't good, everyone just flocked to your servers before free transfers closed.